Rossikk:


Name the animals in Nigeria/West Africa that can be domesticated for consumption under natural conditions. Very very few compared to Europe, Asia, and the Americas.. FACT.

Excerpts:

''Thus, one can explain as follows the reasons why the people who spread around the world were Eurasians, not Aboriginal Australians or Native Americans or sub-Saharan Africans. The reasons had nothing to do with differences in the peoples themselves. Instead, the reasons were continental differences in the available wild plant and animal species suitable for domestication, resulting in earlier domestication of a more productive suite of domesticates in Eurasia, plus Eurasia’s east/west axis that facilitated the spread of those domesticates throughout Eurasia.''

Jared Diamond- Guns, Germs and Steel.

http://www.jareddiamond.org/Jared_Diamond/Guns,_Germs,_and_Steel.html

You are quoting Jargons that even you, do not understand. If you can not state your argument like ABC, so that any person can follow..then you don't know what you are talking about.

Animals that thrive in Nigeria.
Cow
Goat
Chicken
Turkey
Fish
Pigs
Snails
Monkey
Rabbit/grasscutters
Elephants
Varieties of birds
Dog


I can go on and on.
Stop looking silly to win an argument.

Rossikk:


Am I your personal researcher? Sorry, I don't work without pay.

Look at this ignorant Man, the first I did was verify your bogus claim that Europe and America had more fertile land than Nigeria.
As at 2013, Nigeria had 33.49% of Arable land as against U.K's 28.68% and U.S 19.04 %. This without factoring in the land mass o

1freshdude:


You are quoting Jargons that even you, do not understand. If you can not state your argument like ABC, so that any person can follow..then you don't know what you are talking about.

Animals that thrive in Nigeria.
Cow
Goat
Chicken
Turkey
Fish
Pigs
Snails
Monkey
Rabbit/grasscutters
Elephants
Varieties of birds
Dog


I can go on and on.
Stop looking silly to win an argument.

We are talking animals that people actually use. So exclude your dogs, monkeys and elephants and ''varieties of birds''. You don't understand yet are talking garbage. Europe domesticates horses easily, which helped in agriculture as they pull weights for transportation. They domesticated wolves, that protected the herd. Heavy oxen to pull large weights. Try and raise a horse in Nigeria and see how far you get. Europe domesticates sheep, ducks, water buffalos, red foxes, geese, ferrets, doves, canaries, in addition to all you listed for Africa. There is no comparison. When you enter a market in Europe, you will see a huge variety of different types of meat you've never seen in your life. And I mean, EVERY part of Europe. Every country. Their climate supports it. No tsetse fly, no funny tropical diseases, perfect soil, and rain all year round - even during summer! It's always been like that - even before the Industrial Revolution.

''So, with that in mind, why was it the people of the Middle East and Europe who came to dominate the world? Difficult as it is to summarize a 500-page book into a few sentences, it boils down to two main things: the best domesticable crops and the best domesticable animals are all native to the Fertile Crescent, and can adapt easily to the climate of Europe. Although agriculture may have developed in several different places, such as in China with the domestication of rice, it was the wheat, barley, and other crops native to the Fertile Crescent that spread most widely across Eurasia.'' - Jared Diamond

The climatic/soil conditions of Africa are the worst on earth for agriculture and animal husbandry. FACT. Do you know that half of Africa is desert? Another quarter is arid, a third is thick forest with acidic soil. Perhaps less than 20% of the continent has ideal conditions for agriculture. That is the reason why food surplus has always been difficult to achieve in Africa, especially in non-temperate regions outside South Africa and the North African coast. Everywhere else is either terrible or poor in terms of natural conditions.

Rossikk:


We are talking animals that people actually use. So exclude your dogs, monkeys and elephants and ''varieties of birds''. You don't understand yet are talking garbage. Europe domesticates horses easily, which helped in agricuture as they pull weights for transportation. Try and raise a horses in Nigeria and see how far you get.

''So, with that in mind, why was it the people of the Middle East and Europe who came to dominate the world? Difficult as it is to summarize a 500-page book into a few sentences, it boils down to two main things: the best domesticable crops and the best domesticable animals are all native to the Fertile Crescent, and can adapt easily to the climate of Europe. Although agriculture may have developed in several different places, such as in China with the domestication of rice, it was the wheat, barley, and other crops native to the Fertile Crescent that spread most widely across Eurasia.''

The climatic/soil conditions of Africa are the worst on earth for agriculture and animal husbandry. FACT. Do you know that half of Africa is desert? Another quarter is arid, a third is thick forest with acidic soul. Perhaps less than 20% of the continent has ideal conditions for agriculture. That is the reason why food surplus has always been difficult to achieve in Africa, especially in non-temperate regions outside South Africa and the North African coast. Everywhere else is either terrible or poor in terms of natural conditions.

Oga you are ignorant loud and stupid! The problem is that we have many of you and that is the reason the OP thinks we are cursed!

Nigeria is immensely favoured by geography. Wallow in your ignorance and bullshits, am out!

1freshdude:


Oga you are ignorant loud and stupid! The problem is that we have many of you and that is the reason the OP thinks we are cursed!

Nigeria is immensely favoured by geography. Wallow in your ignorance and bullshits, am out!

I quoted scientific studies with references that show the contrary, while you quoted your pepper-soup and ogogoro studies retrieved from Uranus.

I'll leave readers to decide which is right.

Oh, and it's ''I'm'', not ''am''.

1freshdude:


Look at this ignorant Man, the first I did was verify your bogus claim that Europe and America had more fertile land than Nigeria.
As at 2013, Nigeria had 33.49% of Arable land as against U.K's 28.68% and U.S 19.04 %. This without factoring in the land mass o

Kai... Ignorance. We are not talking of the availability of ''arable land''. We are talking of SOIL QUALITY, even on the arable land.

Nigeria can have 60% 'arable land' ie cultivable land. Does not mean the QUALITY of the soil is good. It simply means that stuff can grow on it. Just not as well or as fast as it will grow on OTHER types of arable land in temperate regions, and without the variety of crops supported by the soil in those other regions, which have low soil acidity etc. compared to West Africa.

It was because of this that even in pre-industrial times, the farming communities of European nations were relatively small, and able to feed whole populations. Food surpluses were routine. Famine was unheard of. This allowed many to veer into other areas of human activity such as the arts, and the sciences.... In Africa, the poor soil meant that majority had to be involved in agriculture to create a bumper harvest. It was made worse because due to the climatic conditions we could not breed horses, which served as transport for millions of farmers in Europe and the Americas etc. So this is the history we are coming from.

And when you consider the cumulative effects of these natural disadvantages over several centuries and even thousands of years, it is not that hard to understand why Europe became advanced before Africa.

The pre-requisite for any real development in a country is food surplus, with minimal human involvement. Once you achieve that, THEN you are on your way to genuine development, because you've solved the hunger problem, while freeing up your population to pursue other useful tasks outside the farm.

Rossikk:


Stop typing rubbish. Nigerian/West African soil is very unfriendly to grass. In Europe and other temperate regions you don't even need to plant any grass before it grows. All you have to do is trim and cut. That's why everywhere is covered on grass as a lawn, or there's a pavement/road, and very little sand to see. It is about soil type.

Oga, we have plenty of grasses abi bush here and you are saying we don't have grass

InyinyaAgbaOku:


Oga, we have plenty of grasses abi bush here and you are saying we don't have grass

Oh lawd...Here we go again...

Please, just go away. I have no power to start educating you too. I actually think you're too thick to grasp any of this, given the quality of your posts on this forum.

Rossikk:


Motor park tout with zero education discussing economics, soil quality and politics. Only on Nairaland.

Because I spoke pidgin I'm now an illitrate? Lol....Msc Architecture, Associate member of the Nigerian Institute of Architects here bro, from The Belarusian National Technical University....so now u can die in peace. Lol

agongajoseph:
Because I spoke pidgin I'm now an illitrate? Lol....Msc Architecture, Associate member of the Nigerian Institute of Architects here bro, from The Belarusian National Technical University....so now u can die in peace. Lol

Wow... you learnt copy and paste. Well done. Your adult education fees didn't go to waste.

Rossikk:


Wow... you learnt copy and paste. Well done. Your adult education fees didn't go to waste.

hahahahahaha... You just made my fvcking New year.

h

Asking whether or not the black race is cursed does provoke a philosophical inquiry into the overall effects,that is if there are any at all,of curses. It is extremely difficult to imagine how your brain is able to process this information without it being grounded in logic or any factual evidence that supports your claim that curses are factors to consider in the discourse of race distinction, industrial competence and IQ. (I am going to have to conclude this is where your question leads to).

If by curse you intended to ask why Africa is backward or stagnant or even disoriented,I think there are far more important reasons than excuses stem . Pretenders to the throne of expertise have yet to do away with logical fallacy on the topic of development. Whenever they speak or write there are more conflicting assumptions,illogical comparisons,lame excuses than deep philosophical inquiries. The moment they step out of critical thinking they do a tremendous disservice to the intellect . This,among others,is one reason why I view with deep suspicion their scraps of papers. One expert trying to explain why highly publicised policies that have been successfully implemented in other climes don't succeed in sub-sahara Africa tied it to SOCIAL PREFERENCE. Ever wondered why billions of public fund spent on infrastructure don't yield any positive results? Pretenders will beat their chest and tell us that corruption is the reason to conclude with. While this may be true on the surface,it is indeed a half-truth on a close inspection. For an accurate answer dig for what the German philosopher Hegel described as the Spirit of The Age. Corruption is not so correct an answer because it does define to a large extent the content of the human character which is subject to change and which is impossible to perfect.

Here one Rossick has brought himself to my attention, thanks to those very myopic conclusions which he has sustained by the death of his wits. No one but a completely ignorant fellow should ascribe developmental failures,especially poor physical development(urban and regional planning) to the quality of the soil or lush green grasses. What is the percentage of arable land in a desert-turned-New York like Dubai? Or even in Singapore where are more likely to become a fisherman than farmer?
Anyone who has read Ian Morris ' Why The West Rules would surely understand what the author meant by the PARADOX OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT. Geography is a factor though but not the major one. What about the sheer determination of the people to build a transformative society as experienced in Russia for nine decades( 1917-1989).

Africa as a whole is a continent in chaos. It emerged from a nature-imposed chaos only to enter a man-imposed chaos beginning with the rape and balkanization that came at the price of Europe's avarice and territorial theft. This history is well known and has continued to excite arguments and counter-arguments in intellectual circles.

Low IQ Africa is one in a million half-truths about Africa. It is a claim that is true by sunup and false by sundown. It is true this minute but false the next. This is how I have always viewed Africa. I am optimistic,but not a deceptive or realistic optimist. I believe we can make it here but the only depressing thing is waking up daily to the sight of a useless generation such as ours. Everywhere you turn to you are greeted by the uncleanness of the streets and the boorishness of the masses. The only good thing to see and probably relate to is the excessive indulgence in pop culture.

Africa is, at the moment, a lost cause.

,

Rossikk:


Oh lawd...Here we go again...

Please, just go away. I have no power to start educating you too. I actually think you're too thick to grasp any of this, given the quality of your posts on this forum.

This thread is a testament to the 'quality' of your own posts.
I will leave others yo tackle you. They seem to be doing a hood job